| More VAR controversy 09:07 - Aug 19 with 877 views | SonicBoom |
Loads of talk about var today following the weekend and last night's decisions.
I don't know if the problem is var.
Last night Carragher and Neville thought it was a pen. This morning Stelling and McCoist were convinced it wasn't.
Football is subjective and most calls are a matter of opinion so there will never be total agreement.
Ex players always want ex players to operate var as they have 'played the game at the highest level' but they can't even agree amongst themselves. |  | | |  |
| More VAR controversy on 09:27 - Aug 19 with 838 views | Block8 |
And right there lies the problem, VAR in terms of fouls and penalties is just one person's view against another's.
If it needs more than one replay to find an answer(which in itself may be wrong) it's not a clear and obvious error. Offside is different, once the parameters are defined the system is relatively easy. And having seen the lino struggle to keep up with play in a few games I've attended recently it isn't so bad.
Personally I'd keep the offside bit & ditch the rest, it might enhance your viewing if you're a neutral TV viewer but it ruins the game for stadium fans. If they asked ST holders and members of clubs to vote I seriously believe it would go! |  | | |
| More VAR controversy on 10:08 - Aug 19 with 785 views | DorsetIan |
| More VAR controversy on 09:27 - Aug 19 by Block8 |
And right there lies the problem, VAR in terms of fouls and penalties is just one person's view against another's.
If it needs more than one replay to find an answer(which in itself may be wrong) it's not a clear and obvious error. Offside is different, once the parameters are defined the system is relatively easy. And having seen the lino struggle to keep up with play in a few games I've attended recently it isn't so bad.
Personally I'd keep the offside bit & ditch the rest, it might enhance your viewing if you're a neutral TV viewer but it ruins the game for stadium fans. If they asked ST holders and members of clubs to vote I seriously believe it would go! |
The problem with VAR is that it was never intended as another layer of referring.
It was intended to make sure that absolutely howlers were avoided. And that's it. Just howlers.
So it was never intended to police offside to the level of millimetres either.
They would need to go back to the drawing board and set the bar much much higher as to when it can intervene for it to work as intended.
And they're not going to do that. Too much of a gravy train now. There are typically FOUR people opearating VAR per game. Add to the four at the game - that's EIGHT people referring each game.
And they still make an absolute hash of a good chunk of the decisions!
What an absolute joke this system is. | |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 11:39 - Aug 19 with 709 views | SaintNick |
| More VAR controversy on 10:08 - Aug 19 by DorsetIan |
The problem with VAR is that it was never intended as another layer of referring.
It was intended to make sure that absolutely howlers were avoided. And that's it. Just howlers.
So it was never intended to police offside to the level of millimetres either.
They would need to go back to the drawing board and set the bar much much higher as to when it can intervene for it to work as intended.
And they're not going to do that. Too much of a gravy train now. There are typically FOUR people opearating VAR per game. Add to the four at the game - that's EIGHT people referring each game.
And they still make an absolute hash of a good chunk of the decisions!
What an absolute joke this system is. |
Totally agree with you, the system is there to get 75% of the decisions right that could be either way, it is not to draw lines to find toenails over the line.
Use it in the right way and it will improve the game, use it retrospectively to clamp down on divers and it will work better, the fact that VAR is there did stop some of the virtual wrestling matches taking place at corners and dead ball situations for a while, but i notice it is sneaking back into the game |  |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 12:02 - Aug 19 with 692 views | DorsetIan |
| More VAR controversy on 11:39 - Aug 19 by SaintNick |
Totally agree with you, the system is there to get 75% of the decisions right that could be either way, it is not to draw lines to find toenails over the line.
Use it in the right way and it will improve the game, use it retrospectively to clamp down on divers and it will work better, the fact that VAR is there did stop some of the virtual wrestling matches taking place at corners and dead ball situations for a while, but i notice it is sneaking back into the game |
The tragedy is how much of a negative impact it has had on the game. Talk about unintended consequences.
What a joy that when Jack Stephens' goal went in all we had to do was a quick look to the linesman and continue celebrating.
VAR and Peter Drury's Sky commentaries absolutely ruin the PL for me. | |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 12:22 - Aug 19 with 670 views | solent_toffee |
A few weeks ago I was watching the charity shield with my nieces husband. McAllister clearly handles the ball in his area preventing it from going the Palace player. As clear a penalty as you could ever wish to see. Nieces husband straight away said it wasn’t and cited some bullshit new rule that I’d never heard of and didn’t make any sense.
The penalty wasn’t given.
In short, I don’t think anyone has a bloody clue what the rules are when it comes to VAR, least of all the officials who are so inconsistent bordering on incompetent. | | | |
| More VAR controversy on 12:36 - Aug 19 with 654 views | Berber |
Your nieces husband had a clue. |  |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 12:40 - Aug 19 with 648 views | solent_toffee |
| More VAR controversy on 12:36 - Aug 19 by Berber |
Your nieces husband had a clue. |
How was that not a penalty? | | | |
| More VAR controversy on 13:59 - Aug 19 with 587 views | SaintNick |
| More VAR controversy on 12:02 - Aug 19 by DorsetIan |
The tragedy is how much of a negative impact it has had on the game. Talk about unintended consequences.
What a joy that when Jack Stephens' goal went in all we had to do was a quick look to the linesman and continue celebrating.
VAR and Peter Drury's Sky commentaries absolutely ruin the PL for me. |
Used properly VAR can clear a goal as Ok within 30 seconds it could then be given another 30seconds to decide whether it should be disallowed and the decision made before the scorer has barely reached the corner flag and pumped his chest on the badge. | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| More VAR controversy on 14:02 - Aug 19 with 584 views | SonicBoom |
My point was that VAR won't get everything right - or wrong. For every decision there is general outrage it was given, or other fans defending it and saying it was correct.
VAR does not decide if a foul is a foul. People do. It's someone's opinion and interpretation of the laws. Exactly as it was when we just had a ref.
Back then the media ripped him to shreds every week highlighting every mistake and saying we must help the refs with new technology. Now everyone wants rid of it apparently.
But lets face it, it is there for the money so that a team doesn't lose millions from a wrong call and so it's never going to go away.
We wished for it, now we gotta live with it. | | | |
| More VAR controversy on 14:22 - Aug 19 with 563 views | kingslandstand1 |
| More VAR controversy on 13:59 - Aug 19 by SaintNick |
Used properly VAR can clear a goal as Ok within 30 seconds it could then be given another 30seconds to decide whether it should be disallowed and the decision made before the scorer has barely reached the corner flag and pumped his chest on the badge. |
I've said all along that IF we have to have VAR then if a definitive decision cannot be made within a certain time (1 min, 2 mins whatever?) then stick with the original onfield decision even off the ball incidents or in the build up to a "goal"
I haven't read this whole thread yet, but I'm sure someone would have mentioned the original reasoning for VAR - clear and obvious! |  |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 15:27 - Aug 19 with 520 views | DorsetIan |
| More VAR controversy on 13:59 - Aug 19 by SaintNick |
Used properly VAR can clear a goal as Ok within 30 seconds it could then be given another 30seconds to decide whether it should be disallowed and the decision made before the scorer has barely reached the corner flag and pumped his chest on the badge. |
With 6 people (ref, line + 4 VAR) now involved, how is that ever going to be resolved in 30 seconds?
Two of them are technicians. angles to check, some zooming in, maybe some lines to draw, oh and and a rewind to check if the goalkeeper farted at the last goal kick.
Believe me, THIS system can never work. They would need to go back to the drawing board completely and they're not going to do that because of (1) commerical VAR contracts and (2) cowardice.
Stick a fork in it, its done. | |
| |
| More VAR controversy on 17:22 - Aug 19 with 458 views | InTimeAddedOn |
| More VAR controversy on 15:27 - Aug 19 by DorsetIan |
With 6 people (ref, line + 4 VAR) now involved, how is that ever going to be resolved in 30 seconds?
Two of them are technicians. angles to check, some zooming in, maybe some lines to draw, oh and and a rewind to check if the goalkeeper farted at the last goal kick.
Believe me, THIS system can never work. They would need to go back to the drawing board completely and they're not going to do that because of (1) commerical VAR contracts and (2) cowardice.
Stick a fork in it, its done. |
Agreed DorsetIan. What I don’t understand with this nonsense of players being offside by a toenail or half a kneecap is the laws still state a player being level with the opponent is onside. If 99.9 % of the player is still level and 0.1% isn’t then any sane minded person with even an atom of common sense would say the player is still level with the opponent and therefore onside. It takes a special breed of pedant to call that as offside, sadly for the rest of us the upper echelons of refereeing is infested with said creatures. A breed apart within football? Never a truer word spoken…
One thing that I am led to believe is being worked on is AI assisted offside decisions. The ultimate aim is to have this part of VAR fully automated and as fast and reliable as the goal decision system that tells us if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. If this happens then whilst I still say the above point is still valid about level being onside where it is just a kneecap or toenail involved if we have to continue to tolerate this nonsense then at least it won’t take three and a half minutes whilst some Gimbert sits there drawing lines and toggling the freeze frame back and forth to try and justify such ridiculous offside decisions. [Post edited 19 Aug 17:26]
|  | | |
| More VAR controversy on 21:43 - Aug 19 with 347 views | DorsetIan |
| More VAR controversy on 17:22 - Aug 19 by InTimeAddedOn |
Agreed DorsetIan. What I don’t understand with this nonsense of players being offside by a toenail or half a kneecap is the laws still state a player being level with the opponent is onside. If 99.9 % of the player is still level and 0.1% isn’t then any sane minded person with even an atom of common sense would say the player is still level with the opponent and therefore onside. It takes a special breed of pedant to call that as offside, sadly for the rest of us the upper echelons of refereeing is infested with said creatures. A breed apart within football? Never a truer word spoken…
One thing that I am led to believe is being worked on is AI assisted offside decisions. The ultimate aim is to have this part of VAR fully automated and as fast and reliable as the goal decision system that tells us if the whole of the ball is over the whole of the line. If this happens then whilst I still say the above point is still valid about level being onside where it is just a kneecap or toenail involved if we have to continue to tolerate this nonsense then at least it won’t take three and a half minutes whilst some Gimbert sits there drawing lines and toggling the freeze frame back and forth to try and justify such ridiculous offside decisions. [Post edited 19 Aug 17:26]
|
Your point about players being level is bang on.
As soon as VAR came in the concept of level being onside effectively disappeared.
If you take the concept of judging when two players are level, in every single pre VAR football came that decision was made from the touchline and in every single non-VAR game that decision is made from the touchline. That has to be a common sense judgment call.
If VAR is to be used to judge offside, the level is onside rule should play a part in it. And I believe the only 'assistance' that should be given is maybe a better view from the touchline.
And yes 'level' should be given a broad interpretation and the attacking player should always get the benefit of the doubt.
That's why that rule was brought in in the first place. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
